London Passport Office

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On what date the London Passport Office changed its location from Petty France; why post offices are still handing out passport application forms showing the Petty France address; and what steps they intend to take to end the consequent inconvenience to those who wish to visit the London Passport Office.

Lord Rooker: The London Passport Office began issuing passports from Globe House in Eccleston Square, London SW1, on Monday 4 June 2001. After a phased transfer of all passport business, Clive House, Petty France, closed to the public on Friday 26 October.
	Post Office Ltd was informed of the change of address at an early stage, the application form pack was reprinted and a leaflet was included to show the change of address. On cost grounds, all existing stock held by Post Office branches was not scrapped and it is possible that not all old stock has yet been exhausted. An option might have been to withdraw all application stock containing the Petty France address. But this would have been expensive and of little value in most of the United Kingdom as those in receipt of such forms would have had no intention of attending the London Passport Office.
	However, all application form packs should contain a leaflet showing current fees and advising that personal attendance at a passport office is by appointment only. Customers telephoning the United Kingdom Passport Service (UKPS) 24-hour adviceline for an appointment are given directions to the office and advice on what they need to take.
	In addition to the application form package and the adviceline, information on the relocation was available from the UKPS website and through UKPS publicity placed in local media such as the Evening Standard and London Metro. Post Office Ltd was briefed by UKPS on the response for its counter staff to give customers wishing to visit the London Passport Office—namely, that customers should contact the UKPS adviceline for an appointment and information.

Racial Profiling

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, and if so by what means, racial profiling is forbidden in the police service in the exercise of powers of arrest, stop and search and other law enforcement action.

Lord Rooker: The Government are opposed to "racial profiling", which can generally be described as the practice of police and other law enforcement officers relying on race, colour or ethnic origin as the basis for subjecting persons to investigatory activities or for determining whether an individual is engaged in criminal activity.
	The Code of Practice (A) under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, which relates to stop and search, makes clear that a person's race, age or appearance cannot be used alone as a reason for searching that person. It also makes clear that reasonable suspicion cannot be based on generalisations or stereotypical images of certain groups or categories of people as more likely to be involved in criminal activity.
	In addition, a police force in performing its public functions, including its enforcement functions, would need to be mindful of its obligations under the Race Relations Act 1976. These would include obligations resulting from the amendments made to the Race Relations Act 1976 by the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000.

Mr Colin May

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On what basis the Police Complaints Authority can justify a six-month inquiry period in relation to a case where the act of violence against the person complained of by Mr Colin May of Erith was captured on a video in its entirety and provided to the police at the commencement of the inquiry.

Lord Rooker: The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police informs me that a total of 15 officers are to be interviewed for this investigation, many of whom were present at the incident. To date, 12 have been interviewed. Interviews with the other three have been arranged for the beginning of April. The Police Complaints Authority expects the investigation to be concluded by the end of April.

Police Complaints Authority: Audit

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What audit arrangements exist, to which the public have access, in the case of the investigation costs of the Police Complaints Authority.

Lord Rooker: The Police Complaints Authority is audited internally by the Home Office Audit and Assurance Unit and externally by the National Audit Office every year. Its accounts and audit certificate are published in full within its annual report, which is laid before Parliament prior to the Summer Recess each year. Copies of the annual report and accounts can be obtained by the public from The Stationery Office.
	The PCA supervises police investigations of the more serious complaints. However, the costs of the actual investigation are borne by the forces themselves and therefore would be submitted in the accounts of the relevant police authorities.

Yarl's Wood

Lord Judd: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many people who were in detention in Yarl's Wood at the time of the recent fire there have since been deported; how many have been or are still detained in prison elsewhere without charge; what are the reasons in each of these categories; and what has been the Government's response to representations on these matters by the United Nations High Commission for Refugees.

Lord Rooker: The immigration and asylum cases of those held at Yarl's Wood removal centre have continued to be processed in the normal way. If the conclusion is reached in such cases that the persons concerned have no basis of stay in this country, they will be removed. This point will already have been reached in some of the cases and the individuals concerned will have been removed from the United Kingdom. This will continue to be the case.
	Detainees who are assessed to pose a control and security risk will be transferred from immigration removal centres to prison accommodation in line with established policy. This will include detainees held at Yarl's Wood at the time of the incident and individuals held at other removal centres.
	Exact figures for the number of former Yarl's Wood detainees removed from the United Kingdom or held in prison accommodation could be obtained only by examination of individual records at disproportionate cost.
	UNHCR met with the Home Secretary on 7 March and raised a number of issues regarding detention including Yarl's Wood and the points raised will be considered.

Immigration Service Operational Enforcement Manual

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Bassam of Brighton on 19 March 2001 (WA 127), whether they will now publish the operational enforcement manual containing instructions for members of the Immigration Service.

Lord Rooker: It remains our intention to make the operational enforcement manual available on the Immigration and Nationality Directorate website (www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk) in due course. However, I regret that other priorities have resulted in the work on this project being seriously delayed since the reply given by my noble friend Lord Bassam last year.

Terrorist Extradition Proceedings

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many terrorist extradition proceedings have been initiated since 1970; how many have been successful; and what nations they were being extradited from.

Lord Rooker: Reliable statistical information on extradition requests to other countries, with the exception of the Republic of Ireland, has been kept only since 1997. Details of requests made to the Republic of Ireland under the backing of warrants arrangements between our two countries are not held centrally. Extradition requests are based on specific offences, such as murder, which do not necessarily disclose whether an offence is of a terrorist nature. Statistics since 1970, therefore, could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. The available information in relation to extradition requests for terrorist offences is as follows.
	Two fugitives were requested from the Netherlands, and surrendered, in 1999. Three fugitives were requested from Slovakia, and surrendered, in 2001.

Asylum Seekers: Utility Bills

Lord Beaumont of Whitley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What provision has been made for asylum seekers who are in receipt of vouchers to pay their utility bills; and what is the mechanism for payment.

Lord Rooker: Asylum seekers in the National Asylum Support Service (NASS) accommodation do not pay utility bills. The costs of their accommodation and any utilities are met centrally. Asylum seekers in receipt of subsistence only support (vouchers) from NASS do not receive any additional help to meet the costs of their accommodation or any associated bills.

Criminal Justice System Annual Report

Lord Davies of Coity: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they intend to publish the criminal justice system annual report for 2000–01.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: My right honourable friend the Home Secretary, my noble and learned friend the Attorney-General and I will today be publishing jointly an annual report on the criminal justice system for England and Wales.
	The document follows on the Criminal Justice System Strategic and Business Plan, published in May 2000.
	Copies of the report will be placed in the Library of the House.

Government Departments: Assets of Cultural Significance

Lord Freyberg: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord McIntosh on 18 March (WA 124), whether they will give a full breakdown of all the assets of cultural significance held by each government department listed in the National Asset Register; and
	Whether they will list and provide valuations for the "250 items of furniture; fittings and artefacts classified as antiques" described in the entry for the Chancellor of the Exchequer's Departments in the National Asset Register.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Government departments hold various assets of cultural significance which are summarised in the National Asset Register. Each department is required separately to identify heritage assets in the National Asset Register and provide a summary of them.
	A full list of individual heritage assets is not held centrally. It would be impractical to do so. Further information on departmental assets is available from resource accounts.

Government Departments: Assets of Cultural Significance

Lord Freyberg: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Treasury consulted independent expert advice before drawing up the inventory of 250 antiques which was given to W & FC Bonham & Sons for valuation.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Independent expert advice on the preparation of the Treasury's inventory was provided by Bonhams. However, on the question of auction I refer the noble Lord to an Answer in the House on 29 October (Official Report, col. 1175).

Government Departments: Assets of Cultural Significance

Lord Freyberg: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they consider that objects which are of small monetary value can be of great historical and heritage significance; and, if so, whether it is appropriate for the Government to evaluate the heritage assets they hold in financial terms.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether government departments are required to seek independent, expert advice before identifying the heritage assets that are subsequently recorded in the National Asset Register.

Lord Freyberg: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why the Treasury's policy on non-operational heritage assets differs from that of the Lord Chancellor's Department, which does not "capitalise non-operational antiques such as painting and works of art" (HC Deb, 9 November 2001, 487W).

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: All government departments decide what to capitalise on the basis of accounting policies set out in the Resource Accounting Manual (RAM). These policies follow advice from an independent statutory body, the Financial Reporting Advisory Board (FRAB). A copy of the Resource Accounting Manual is available in the Library of the House and on the Internet.
	The Government agree that certain assets can be of considerable cultural and heritage significance. That is why the Government's accounting framework gives detailed guidance on how heritage assets should be accounted for. This makes it clear that heritage assets should generally appear in departments' balance sheets, both for transparency reasons and to encourage good stewardship of assets by the owner entity.
	However, departments are permitted not to capitalise or value non-operational heritage assets where, because of their special characteristics, valuing them may not be practicable or appropriate. This would apply where the cost of obtaining a valuation outweighs the benefits or where it is impossible to establish a sufficiently reliable valuation. Consequently, departments need not value paintings and works of art within heritage collections.
	It is typically the entity holding the assets which is solely competent to decide which are heritage assets. Departments are therefore required to attest annually to the ongoing heritage credentials of their heritage assets. In doing so they are free, but not obliged, to seek expert independent advice. The balance sheet treatment of all assets is subject to validation independently through the audit process.

Government Departments: Assets of Cultural Significance

Lord Freyberg: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will review valuations policy in light of the two lots of silver that were auctioned by W & FC Bonham & Sons on 30 October 2001, which sold for well over twice their highest pre-sale estimates.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Divergence between a valuer's estimate of the value of a particular item and its actual sale price is not unusual, especially in a case where the interest of buyers has been enhanced by media attention.

Government Departments: Assets of Cultural Significance

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the "small number of antiques to the value of £3,000" that were disposed of by the National Investment and Loans Office during 2000–01, as mentioned on page 645 of the National Asset Register.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: NILO initiated the disposals following an office move: £3,000 of surplus antique furniture—chairs, tables and a document cabinet—were sold by Hamptons Fine Art Auctioneers in 2000–01.

Government Departments: Assets of Cultural Significance

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Bank of England holds no assets which could be considered as items of national heritage.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Bank of England operates independently of government. Her Majesty's Government do not hold any information on its asset holdings beyond that listed in the National Asset Register (page 616) which was itself computed from book values entered in the published accounts of the Bank.

Government Departments: Assets of Cultural Significance

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Answer by Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 25 October 2001 (Official Report col. 1102) that "it has been decided not to sell items valued at over £1 million with the greatest historical and heritage significance", whether they own any items of heritage significance valued at over £1 million; and, if so, whether they will list them.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Treasury owns no single item valued at over £1 million. My previous Answer referred to several separate items whose total estimated value is £1.05 million. These items were a set of 12 silver candlesticks (value £600,000) and three James II Treasury inkstands (£450,000).

Government Departments: Assets of Cultural Significance

Lord Freyberg: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the policy of the Inland Revenue on reducing its heritage assets following the introduction of resource accounting and budgeting; and
	Whether the Inland Revenue and Valuation Office Agency have changed their policy on reducing the heritage assets following the introduction of resource accounting and budgeting and the transfer of land and buildings to the private sector under a public private partnership project.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The heritage assets of the Inland Revenue and Valuation Office Agency have not been transferred to the private sector. No land and buildings held by the Inland Revenue either before or after the transfer of the estate to the private sector were held as heritage assets.
	The Inland Revenue and Valuation Office Agency do not have a policy to reduce the level of heritage assets held.

Organic and Non-fossil Fuels: Duty

The Earl of Mar and Kellie: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether duty other than VAT can be charged on organic and non-fossil fuels; whether such duty is charged in other European Union member states such as Germany; and whether they would consider it appropriate to charge such duty in the United Kingdom.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The European Directive on mineral oils duties structures requires organic and non-fossil fuels used as road fuels to be taxed at the same rate as the mineral oil for which they are substituting. The UK already charges excise duty on organic and non-fossil fuels for use as a road fuel but, where it judges there are sound environmental reasons for doing so, it takes advantage of the option of derogation to introduce duty incentives to promote the development and use of alternative fuels. For example, in Budget 2001 the Government announced a new lower rate of duty for biodiesel, to be set at 20p per litre lower than mineral diesel from later this year. In Pre-Budget Report 2001, the Government announced excise duty exemptions for pilot projects involving biogas, hydrogen and methanol.
	Other member states are also subject to the same requirements as the UK but similarly are free to seek derogations from the European directive on mineral oils duties structures to apply lower rates of duty or exemptions for organic and non-fossil fuels.

Voluntary Sporting Clubs: Taxation

Lord Smith of Leigh: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to reduce the burden of taxation and other regulations on voluntary sporting clubs.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Charity Commission announced in November 2001 that it would recognise as charitable "the promotion of community participation in healthy recreation by the provision of facilities for particular sports"—conferring the full range of charity tax relief. The Promoting Sport in the Community consultation document launched in November 2001 outlined a possible additional tax package and sought views on the best way to support community amateur sports clubs. Decisions will be made as part of the normal Budget process.

Voluntary Sporting Clubs: Taxation

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many community amateur sports clubs responded to the consultation document Promoting Sport in the Community; how many of those respondents answered the question posed as to whether they agreed with the Government's assessment that the Charity Commission's proposals which now include "healthy recreation" as a charitable activity meant that the Inland Revenue tax breaks were no longer needed; and how many of those clubs which gave an answer replied "No".

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Over 2,400 responses have been received to the Promoting Sport in the Community consultation document. Decisions will be made as part of the normal Budget process, with regard to the range of responses received. A summary of responses will be made publicly available at the time of any announcement.

Defence Budget: VAT

Lord Freeman: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any VAT is paid on procuring defence equipment by the Defence Procurement Agency; and, if so, whether it is refunded to the defence budget.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: VAT is payable on procuring some defence equipment. In common with other government departments, the Ministry of Defence can recover some of the VAT it incurs under Section 41(3) of the VAT Act 1994. VAT which cannot be so recovered is taken into account when the budget for the Ministry of Defence is agreed.

Parliamentary Questions

Baroness Gale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to raise the advisory cost limit of £550 for answering Parliamentary Questions for Written Answer.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The advisory cost limit was last increased on 20 May 2000 and is to be further increased to £600 from today.
	The purpose and application of the advisory cost limit remains unchanged. It is intended to act as a threshold for disproportionate cost Parliamentary Questions (PQs). Any written PQ where the marginal cost of preparing the Answer is considered likely to exceed the threshold may be refused in whole or in part on the grounds of disproportionate cost. Alternatively, the Minister may decide that the PQ is to be answered irrespective of cost. There is no advisory limit for oral PQs.
	The advisory limit continues to be based on eight times the average marginal cost for written PQs, which is now £75, rounded down to the nearest £50 for convenience of application.

Parliamentary Questions

Baroness Billingham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their current estimate of the average cost of answering (a) a Parliamentary Question for Written Answer; and (b) an oral Parliamentary Question.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: As at April 2001, the average cost of answering a written Parliamentary Question and an oral Parliamentary Question was £129 and £299 respectively.

Register of Friendly Societies

Lord Freyberg: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the policy of the Registry of Friendly Societies on reducing its heritage assets following the introduction of resource accounting and budgeting.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Registry of Friendly Societies (RFS) ceased to exist on 1 April 2002.

European Union: Forthcoming Council Business

Baroness Billingham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the forthcoming business in the Council of the European Union for April, and what are the major European Union events for the period between 30 April and September 2002.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: See the following list. April 2002 5–6—Brussels—Luxembourg—Migrations Council (ASEM Informal) 8—Luxembourg—Fisheries Council 13–14—Luxembourg—ECOFIN (Ministerial Informal) 15–16—Luxembourg—General Affairs Council 22–23—Valencia—Euromed Conference 22–23—Luxembourg—Agriculture Council 25–26—Luxembourg—Justice and Home Affairs Council 27–30—Luxembourg—Agriculture Council (Ministerial Informal)
	The following are the principal events in the EU between 1 May and September 2002 (certain relevant events are also included: the list is based on the information available at the date of issue.)
	
		
			 Date Location Event 
			 May 2002   
			 2 Washington EU/US Summit 
			 3–4 Brussels Tourism Council (Ministerial Informal) 
			 6 Brussels Eurogroup (Evening) 
			 7 Brussels ECOFIN 
			 8 Madrid EU/Canada Summit 
			 9  Europe Day 
			 13 Brussels General Affairs Council and Defence Ministers meeting 
			 17–18 Madrid EU-Latin America and Caribbean Summit 
			 21 Brussels Internal Market, Consumers and Tourism Council 
			 23 Brussels Culture and Audio-visual Council 
			 24–26 Brussels Environment Council (Ministerial Informal) 
			 27–28 Brussels Agriculture Council 
			 30 Brussels Development Council 
			 30 Brussels Education and Youth Council 
			 31–1 Brussels Transport Council (Ministerial Informal) 
			  
			 June 2002   
			 3 Brussels Employment and Social Affairs Council 
			 3 Brussels Eurogroup (Evening) 
			 4 Luxembourg ECOFIN 
			 6–8 Brussels Foreign Affairs Council (ASEM Ministers) 
			 6–7 Brussels Industry and Energy Council 
			 10–11 Brussels General Affairs Council 
			 10–11 Brussels Agriculture Council 
			 11 Brussels Fisheries Council 
			 13–14 Brussels Justice and Home Affairs Council 
			 17–18 Brussels Transport and Telecoms Council 
			 17–18 Brussels General Affairs Council 
			 21–22 Seville European Council 
			 24 Brussels General Affairs Council (Evening) 
			 24–25 Brussels Environment Council 
			 25 Luxembourg ECOFIN 
			 26 Brussels Health Council 
			  
			 July 2002   
			 6 Copenhagen ASEM Ministers for Finance 
			 12 Brussels ECOFIN 
			 12–13 Kolding Meeting of Employment and Social Policy Ministers (Informal) 
			 15–16 Brussels Agriculture Council 
			 19 Brussels Budget Meeting 
			 19–21 Arhus Environment Ministers meeting (Informal) 
			 22–23 Brussels General Affairs Council 
			  
			 August 2002   
			 31–1 Elsinore Gymnich (Ministerial Informal) 
			  
			 September 2002   
			 6 Brussels ASEM Economic Ministers Meetings 
			 6–8 Copenhagen ECOFIN (Ministerial Informal) 
			 8–10 Nyborg Agriculture Council (Ministerial Informal) 
			 12–13 Copenhagen Justice and Home Affairs Council (Ministerial Informal) 
			 22–23 Copenhagen ASEM Meeting 
			 23–24 Brussels Agriculture Council 
			 26 Brussels Internal Market, Consumer Affairs and Tourism Council 
			 27 Tent ACP-EU Ministers Meeting 
			 30 Brussels General Affairs Council 
			 30 Brussels Research Council

International Criminal Court

Baroness Billingham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court will enter into force.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: This is an historic day for international justice and for the human rights of every citizen of the world. Today, at the United Nations in New York, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Ireland, Mongolia, Romania and Slovakia deposited their instruments of ratification to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. These ratifications bring to 63 the number of states to have committed themselves to this landmark convention, and therefore activates the statute, which will enter into force on 1 July 2002.
	The ICC will try those individuals accused of committing war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, irrespective of their rank or position. In future, tyrants will know that their actions are not beyond the reach of international justice. The victims of their crimes will, for the first time, be able to look forward to the prospect of real justice. The culture of impunity, which has shrouded human rights violations for too long, will be over.
	This Government have always been enthusiastic supporters of the court. It is our belief that the global rule of law is stronger than the local rule of tyrants. We played a major part in drafting the statute and worked hard to secure the passage of the International Criminal Court Act through this Parliament and the Scottish Parliament to enable us to be among the first 60 states to ratify.
	The ICC will be a permanent court acting as a permanent deterrent for all potential tyrants. In time, this will be the law which transcends borders and embodies global values. As ever with all institutions of the law, its practice will be as important as its founding principles. We are committed to ensuring that it does its job fairly and impartially. We hope shortly to nominate a British candidate to be one of the judges of the court.

Cefn Croes

The Lord Bishop of Hereford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What calculations they have made of the likely loss of income from tourism in mid-Wales if the proposed wind turbine power station at Cefn Croes were to be built.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: None. There is no concrete evidence that wind turbine power stations discourage tourism; on the contrary, in some cases, they become an attraction in their own right.

BSE Monitoring Scheme

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the total number of cattle slaughtered under the BSE monitoring scheme found to be suffering from tumours of the brain.

Lord Whitty: Testing of cattle for BSE involves sampling of brain stem tissue, which is then subjected to a rapid test for BSE. Brains are not examined for tumours in the course of testing for BSE. As at the end of March 2002, over 175,000 cattle have been tested, of which just over 500 tested positive for BSE.
	Of the 1,218 animals reported as suspect cases for of BSE in 2001, 371 were not found to have the disease. Among these would have been animals suffering from other neurological diseases, including possibly tumours.

Kyoto Protocol

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In implementing Kyoto Protocol commitments, whether they are seeking to minimise the burden of regulation on productive businesses and to maximise the effectiveness of existing schemes on which consumers can rely.

Lord Whitty: The UK's climate change programme provides full details of how the Government intend to meet their commitments under the Kyoto Protocol. In developing the programme, the Government sought to minimise the level of regulation and put together a flexible, cost-effective package of policies to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Each policy was also subject to normal government procedures for producing regulatory impact assessments and one was published for the programme as a whole.
	The final mix of policies in the programme covers all sectors of the economy and includes:
	regulations, for example, the Renewables Obligation and amendments to the building regulations, where it was felt after consultation that these would be the most effective way of achieving the desired results within specific areas;
	economic instruments, for example, the climate change levy and changes to vehicle excise duty and company car tax. These are designed to stimulate better energy efficiency and to encourage the purchase and use of low carbon technologies;
	flexible, innovative measures, like the UK's emissions trading scheme, which will allow companies to make cost-effective emissions reductions;
	voluntary-based agreements like the climate change agreements and EU-level agreements with car manufacturers to reduce CO2 emissions from new cars;
	grant based schemes, like the New Home Energy Efficiency Scheme, and those administered by the Carbon Trust and the Energy Savings Trust; and
	measures to raise consumers' awareness of the issues including the use of energy labels on domestic appliances and the provision of information and advice.

EU Ecolabel

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Whitty on 11 March (WA 53), how the United Kingdom compares with (a) France, (b) Denmark and (c) Italy on the amount spent per year per head of population on the promotion of the EU ecolabelling scheme.

Lord Whitty: There is no reliable information available on a comparable basis for expenditure on promoting the EU ecolabel by the competent bodies in different member states. The European Commission has started to collect more standardised data about the administration and financing of the scheme across the EU. There is also some relevant research on the marketing of the scheme (which can be accessed via the Commission website at www.europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ecolabel/background/marketingstudies.htm) but no comprehensive information about levels of promotional spending in different countries.

Timber Imports

Lord Beaumont of Whitley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much timber is imported into the UK from Brazil; how much of it is illegally sourced; and how this compares with similar figures in other countries of the European Union.

Lord Whitty: International trade in some woods is controlled under the terms of the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). Those species of wood listed in Appendix I and II of CITES require import permits from the UK before import. These are issued only where the UK management authority (Defra) is satisfied that the wood has been legally obtained in the country of origin and has the necessary permit for export from that country. Other species listed in Appendix III of CITES do not require import permits. For these species, a self-completed import notification form must be presented to HM Customs prior to the arrival of the specimens, together with the relevant export permit(s) or certificate(s) of origin issued by the management authority in the exporting country. Both of these provide controls against illegal imports of wood, but it is for the management authority in the country of origin to decide whether the import has been legally logged.
	In 2001, a total of 1,044.716 cubic metres of Appendix III timber was imported into the UK from Brazil, all of which had a valid export permit. There were no imports of Appendix I or II timber.
	According to the most recent trade figures collated by the United Nations Environment Programme, in 1999 the UK imported 51 per cent of the total of timber imported to the EU from Brazil and in 2000, 56 per cent. The figures for total EU imports in 2001 have yet to be collated.

Timber Imports

Lord Beaumont of Whitley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will make it illegal to import timber which has been illegally sourced.

Lord Whitty: Combating illegal logging requires effort from both timber producing and consuming countries. Timber producing countries are responsible for defining and enforcing the national legislative and regulatory frameworks that define legality.
	The Department for International Development (DfID) is working with a number of timber producing countries to help them improve governance and strengthen forest law enforcement. We are also working to develop capacity for the implementation of timber certification schemes in some producing countries.
	Domestically, the UK is working to ensure that the import of endangered timber species is in full compliance with CITES, the Convention on Trade in Endangered Species. We are also implementing a new government timber procurement policy which seeks to ensure that we procure forest products only from legal and sustainable sources.
	The UK has shown leadership under the G8 Action Programme on Forests in promoting bilateral voluntary agreements with timber producing countries whereby countries work together to tackle illegal logging and associated trade. We are currently negotiating the first of these with Indonesia. We hope that bilateral agreements will lead to regional and, eventually, an international agreement that will have a big impact on illegal trade.
	Any changes in legislation that may be necessary would best be applied at the European Union level. UK legislation alone would probably be ineffective, as shipment of illegally logged timber could easily be re-routed via other European ports before entering the UK. Any additional legislation would also need to be enforceable, which would require co-ordinated action between timber producing and importing countries. The UK will, however, take advantage of the next European meeting on Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade on April 22 to 24 to discuss EU policy on this issue. This process may result in a review of EU policy and legislation.

Scrapie

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How ovine genotypes susceptible to scrapie can be identified with accuracy.

Lord Whitty: Susceptibility to scrapie is known to be linked to variations in the amino acids encoded at three sites (codons)—136, 154 and 171—on the sheep PrP gene. The available testing technologies use DNA sequencing to identify those variations. In connection with the national scrapie plan, the Government have awarded contracts to two laboratories to install and operate automated genotyping facilities. A blood sample is taken from the sheep, which is identified by an electronic transponder linked by barcode to the blood sample tube. Internal and external quality controls operate at the laboratories.

Scrapie

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What scientific advice they have received about alternative methods for eliminating scrapie other than widespread slaughter such as the identification of high-immune response animals for breeding programmes.

Lord Whitty: In line with scientific advice, the Government last year launched the national scrapie plan for Great Britain, whose objective is to eradicate scrapie by breeding genetic resistance to transmissible spongiform encephalopathies into the sheep flock. Participation in the plan is voluntary and it does not involve the widespread slaughter of sheep. The plan only requires participants to remove from the breeding flock (either by slaughter or castration) those rams with the genotypes that are the most susceptible to scrapie. So far the proportion of rams falling into this category has been relatively small (about 8 per cent). Where the requirement to remove from the breeding flock causes problems, veterinary advice is available and in exceptional situations appeals can be considered. Experience in other countries indicates that a policy based solely on widespread slaughter is unlikely to be effective in the long term in eradicating scrapie. The available scientific information suggests that scrapie does not promote a detectable immune response in the host. Development of laboratory tests which can identify animals incubating the disease is in progress but a practical technique is not yet available.

Building Regulations Approved Documents

Lord Howie of Troon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On what evidence they have concluded that Building Regulations approved documents have inhibited designers and developers from pursuing innovation in constuction, as stated in the document Regulatory Reform-the Government's Action Plan.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My department consulted on amending Section of 7 of the Building Act 1984 in April 2000. This consultation arose from the Deregulation Task Force report for 1995–96 which said:
	"Anyone who wants to comply with the Building Regulations by a route other than that set out in the Approved Documents must prove to the Building Inspector that their alternative is compliant. We think that this burden of proof should be reversed. The current legal status of approved documents should be changed so that businesses can develop innovative ways of complying with the regulations without having to prove that they are not breaking the law. They should provide a safe haven, not a straitjacket".
	To test this assertion, the consultation proposed that the status of the approved documents should be changed to alter the burden of proof from developers to building control bodies. However, the results of this were inconclusive. While some respondents considered that the current legal status of the documents did inhibit designers and developers, others argued that they did not and that there would be a loss of necessary protection if their status were changed. As a result of this, we are considering how the approved documents could be changed to meet the concerns of all parties.

Airline Passengers

Baroness Wilcox: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What were the main findings of the recent Civil Aviation Authority and Joint Aviation Authorities research into the minimum seat space required for each airline passenger; and whether those findings will, as recommended by the Science and Technology Committee in the 5th Report for Session 1999–2000 on Air Travel and Health, be used to develop an unambiguous set of definitions of aircraft seat sizes so that intending passengers can make an informed decision about the space they are purchasing.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: This research was carried out by ICE Ergonomics Ltd on behalf of the Joint Aviation Authorities under funding from the UK Civil Aviation Authority and was aimed principally at harmonising European standards on the safety issues associated with seating. The main finding suggested that a minimum seat spacing of 29.4 inches is needed to accommodate the 99th percentile of passenger by body size, allowing 1 inch of knee clearance to the back of the seat in front. The report also recommended that in order to guarantee sufficient seated space a minimum foot clearance envelope is needed. These results were based on software modelling using anthropometric data and the research recommends passenger trials to validate the findings.
	In parallel with this, the UK's Aviation Health Working Group has prepared definitions of aircraft seat dimensions covering leg, elbow and hip room. It is intended that these will shortly be agreed with representatives from industy and consumer groups before being circulated to airlines and other interested parties.

Airline Passengers

Baroness Wilcox: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they have taken (a) to promulgate their November 2001 advice to intending air travellers on action to help prevent deep vein thrombosis; and (b) to monitor ways that others further promulgate that advice; and, in particular, what arrangements they have made with airlines about active publicity to passengers in both economy and other classes at the time of booking, at check-in, on take-off and in flight.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The advice produced by the Government in November 2001 has been made available to the public through NHS Direct, the Internet, the airlines and health services. Advice on deep vein thrombosis and travel is also widely available to the public in the Department of Health's Health advice for Travellers booklet.
	The Government have not been prescriptive about how the airlines should present this material to passengers. We have however continued to monitor the use the airlines have made of this advice and are satisfied that they are providing good quality information in a variety of formats, including leaflets, in flight magazines, announcements and videos. The British Air Transport Association has stated that all UK long haul carriers, both charter and scheduled, provide passengers with advice on health before and during the flight.

Airline Passengers

Baroness Wilcox: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many passengers they estimate are carried annually on United Kingdom-registered aircraft that have re-circulatory ventilation systems incorporating less than the highest available standard of high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration; and what action they propose to take to reduce this number to zero.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: All UK registered long haul aircraft have HEPA standard filters fitted. On short haul routes some aircraft types cannot be fitted with HEPA filters or do not re-circulate air and therefore do not require filters. Nevertheless we understand that the majority of UK registered aircraft operating international short haul flights are fitted with HEPA filters.
	It would be difficult to produce reliable estimates in terms of passengers carried.

Building (Amendment) Regulations

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will withdraw the Building (Amendment) Regulations 2002 (S.I. 2002/440) until there has been full consultation with all affected parties, in particular the Federation of Master Builders and the Federation of Small Businesses.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: No. Officials in my department have replied to correspondence from the two federations setting out the full extent of the consultation which took place.

Local Authority Bus Controls

Lord Bradshaw: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in view of the uncertain timescales involved in seeking primary legislation, they will consider using the Regulatory Reform Order procedure to extend the maximum length of local authority bus contracts to 10 years; and when this is likely to be effected.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Use of Regulatory Reform Order procedures in this regard will certainly be considered, but we will of course need to take account of other calls on use of these procedures before a final decision is taken.

Dual Mandate: Proposed Changes

Baroness Scott of Needham Market: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the proposed changes of dual mandate will preclude Members of the House of Lords serving as members of a local authority.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: No. This proposal, if assented to by the European Parliament and agreed by the Council of the European Union, would make membership of the European Parliament incompatible with membership of a national parliament from 2004, though the UK has obtained a derogation for serving members of the UK Parliament until 2009. It has no implications for the membership of local authorities.

London Underground

Baroness Gale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will provide the normal notification period in which to consider the proposed comfort letters laid before this House on 20 March in respect of the London Underground public private partnership.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: We have decided to extend the consultation period for the comfort letters laid before this House on 20 March. This will provide the customary notification period.

Pain Control Clinics

Earl Howe: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many specialist pain control clinics were operational within each region of the National Health Service on the latest date for which figures are available; and how many were operational three years before that.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The Department of Health does not collect this information.
	We are aware of the Clinical Standards Advisory Group report on Services for Patients with Pain published in April 2000, which showed that chronic pain services exist in 220 National Health Service trusts in the United Kingdom.

Pain Control Clinics

Earl Howe: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many specialist pain control clinics have closed during the past three years in Somerset, Wiltshire, Devon and Cornwall.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The information requested is not available centrally.

Pain Control Clinics

Earl Howe: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the average waiting time for each region of the National Health Service for patients referred for consultation at specialist pain control clinics on the latest date for which figures are available.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The average median waiting time for 2000–01, from the date of a decision to admit a patient for treatment for pain management to the admission date, are as follows:
	
		
			 Regional office Median waiting time in days 
			 Northern and Yorkshire 46 
			 Trent 50 
			 West Midlands 50 
			 North West 33 
			 Eastern 64 
			 London 32 
			 South East 55 
			 South West 38 
			 England 48 
		
	
	The figures reflect all National Health Service trusts treating patients with a specialty code for pain management and are based on elective waiting list and booked hospital in-patient admissions.

Primary Care Trusts

Baroness Noakes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to delegate functions to primary care trusts under the terms of the National Health Service Reform and Health Care Professions Bill, once it is enacted, at a date other than the beginning of a financial year; if so, how they will make allocations at that time to primary care trusts to enable them to carry out those delegated functions; and how they will provide for the sharing of the financial responsibility for that financial year between primary care trusts and health authorities (or strategic health authorities).

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: Primary care trusts (PCTs) currently provide or secure the provision of a limited range of services (including primary, community care and secondary care services). Subject to the successful passage of the Bill, more functions will be delegated from health authorities to PCTs from 1 October 2002.
	We currently allocate funding to health authorities, and they in turn allocate funding to PCTs on the basis of the relative needs of their populations. A weighted capitation formula is used to determine each health authority and PCTs' fair share of available resources to enable them to commission similar levels of services for populations in equal need.
	We announced allocations to health authorities for 2002–03 on 6 December 2001. Health authorities are setting initial PCT allocations for 2002–03 for those functions for which PCTs will be responsible from 1 April 2002. PCT allocations will be reset to cover the functions that will be delegated to PCTs from 1 October 2002.
	In future the intention is that allocations will be made direct to PCTs. Allocations will continue to be based on the principle of weighted capitation.

Health Targets

Lord Smith of Leigh: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How they expect any overspending on National Health Service budgets during 2001–02 to impact on the work of acute trusts, primary care trusts and other health bodies in delivering the Government's health targets during 2002–03.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: We are still in discussion with health bodies about managing their end-of-year 2001–02 positions and plans for 2002–03. However, we expect them to live within their agreed resources and not to overspend. Information on the 2001–02 financial position will be made available when National Health Service bodies' accounts have completed audit. This will be in the autumn.

Overseas Broadcasting Organisations:Arabic-speaking Services

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What discussions have taken place between Foreign Office officials and Department for Culture, Media and Sport officials on the issue of licensing of overseas broadcasting organisations to provide services in Arabic within the United Kingdom.

Baroness Blackstone: From time to time officials in my department have discussed the broadcasting of Arabic speaking services with officials in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, both as a matter of general policy and pursuant to any specific licence applications to the ITC, to assist the ITC in fulfilling its statutory obligations under Section 143 of the 1996 Broadcasting Act.

Northern Ireland: Crime Investigations

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What percentage of crime investigations in Northern Ireland of all types have been brought to a successful conclusion during each year from 1994 to date.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: As a result of the major change in the Home Office crime counting rules on 1 April 1998, data from that date cannot be compared directly with previous years. The table below therefore reflects figures from the financial year 1998–99. Provisional figures for the current year from April to December are included.
	
		
			  Total Recorded Crimes Total Crimes Cleared % Clearance Rate 
			 1998–99 109,053 31,639 29.00 
			 1999–00 119,111 36,004 30.20 
			 2000–01 119,912 32,522 27.10 
			 2001–02 (April–December) 104,299 19,295 18.50

Belfast Agreement

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which parts of the Belfast Agreement of 1998 they consider have not been fully implemented, stating in each case by whom and why; and
	What topics relating to non-implementation of the Belfast Agreement of 1998 have been discussed with the Government of the Irish Republic.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Remarkable progress has been made in the implementation of the Belfast Agreement, although much remains to be done. For example, the two major reviews on policing and criminal justice are still in the course of implementation; the security situation is far from normal, while there remains a paramilitary threat, with the consequent security force response, and while the decommissioning issue, despite encouraging recent progress, remains to be resolved; and there remains the question of devolving further responsibility for policing and criminal justice, as envisaged in the agreement. All parties who support the agreement need to proceed in partnership to ensure its effective implementation. We regularly discuss implementation of the agreement, including issues set out above, with the Irish Government.

Northern Ireland: Victim Support

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which organisations and groups benefited from the £18 million allocated as core funding for victims in response to the Bloomfield Report We will remember them (1998); by how much each group: and what are their geographical location and remit.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Since 1998, government have £18.25 million to support victims of the Troubles. Of this, £3.1 million was initially allocated to core fund victims and survivors groups. The core funding scheme, which was introduced in January 2000 for a period of two years, is administered by the Northern Ireland Voluntary Trust (NIVT), which has recently published its annual report for 2001. This report details each core funding allocation to victims' groups as at 31 March 2001.
	The details of grant allocations given in Annex A will vary from those in NIVT's annual report. Annex A gives total grant allocations as at 28 March 2002. Groups are still drawing down money from these allocations and amounts allocated are adjusted as projects progress.
	Details of the geographical location and the main geographical area served by each group are also provided. However, groups may provide support to victims in areas outside those given.
	In December 2001, Des Browne, Victims Minister, announced the allocation of a further £3 million to extend the core funding scheme. An evaluation of the scheme has recently been completed and a report will be published within the next few weeks. Decisions on arrangements for administering this further allocation will be guided by the findings of the evaluation.

Northern Ireland: Victim Support

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the role and remit of the Northern Ireland Office Victims Liaison Unit; and what are its staffing levels and running costs.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Victims Liaison Unit, established in 1998 to implement the recommendations of the Bloomfield Report, is responsible for the provision of core funding to victims support groups; management and provision of grant aid to the Northern Ireland Memorial Fund; prioritisation and allocation of central government funding for victims; and ensuring that all victims' issues which fall within the excepted and reserved fields in Northern Ireland are addressed.
	The unit works in close partnership with the devolved administration's Victims Unit. This co-ordinated approach ensures the most effective support to victims of the Troubles.
	At 25 March 2002, the staffing levels in the Victims Liaison Unit (incorporating the secretariat of the Northern Ireland Memorial Fund) are as follows:
	1 x Grade A (Principal Officer)
	2 x Grade B1 (Deputy Principal Officer)
	2 x Grade B2 (Staff Officer)
	2 x Grade C (Executive Officer)
	1 x Grade D1 (Administrative Officer) part-time
	8 Total Victims Liaison Unit Annual Running Costs The annual running costs for VLU are £309K. Breakdown of figures: Pay and Allowances = £275K* Administrative costs = £34K * This includes the costs of the secondment of two members of staff to the Grants Office of the Northern Ireland Memorial Fund.

Northern Ireland: Victim Support

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the recommendation of the Victims Commissioner (Sir Kenneth Bloomfield) that there should be a comprehensive review of the "fitness for purpose" of criminal injuries compensation in serving the needs of victims of violence has been implemented and, if so, what has been the progress or result.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The recommendation led to an independent review of criminal injuries compensation carried out by Sir Kenneth Bloomfield. That review reported in 1999. In response to recommendations made by the review, the Government published in 2001 proposals for draft legislation. The Criminal Injuries Compensation (Northern Ireland) Order 2002 received Royal Assent on 26 March, and a draft scheme made under the order, which will introduce a tariff-based system of criminal injuries compensation, was laid before the House on 10 April.

Northern Ireland: Victim Support

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the recommendation of the Victims Commissioner (Sir Kenneth Bloomfield) that in dealing with victims within the social security and other systems officials should be sensitive and understanding in their approach has been implemented; and, if so, what progress there has been.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Northern Ireland Executive has taken the lead on the implementation of this recommendation, which focuses mainly on the areas of health and social security. In their draft programme for government, the devolved administration gave a commitment to put in place a cross departmental strategy to ensure the delivery of effective high quality services to victims of the Troubles. This strategy will be launced in the next few weeks.
	A co-ordinated approach is vital to ensure the needs of victims are properly addressed, and the Victims Minister, Des Browne, meets regularly with the Ministers in the devolved administration. As implementation of the devolved administration's strategy proceeds, government will continue to review their approach to meeting victims' needs.

Privy Council Office: Heritage Assets

Lord Freyberg: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether it is the Privy Council Office's policy to reduce the number of heritage assets it holds, following the introduction of resource accounting and budgeting.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: No.

Privy Council Office: Heritage Assets

Lord Freyberg: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the Privy Council Office's policy towards the 132 items of "antique furniture" listed in the National Asset Register as being in "everyday use", with regard to the disposal of heritage assets following the introduction of resource accounting and budgeting.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The furniture will continue in use for as long as it serves its purpose. Items that are no longer of use will be disposed of unless they are of particular historical significance. Items falling within the latter category include a roll-top desk used by Charles Fulke Greville when he was Clerk of the Council, which is on permanent display in the lobby of the Privy Council Office. The Privy Council Office is proud of its heritage and will not dispose of items that would significantly dilute its historical links.

Privy Council Office: Heritage Assets

Lord Freyberg: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the Privy Council Office's policy towards the "heritage antique silver" listed as being "non-operational" in the National Asset Register, with regard to the disposal of its heritage assets following the introduction of resource accounting and budgeting.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: It has been agreed with the National Audit Office that the silver is a donated asset which is exempt from normal capital return requirements under resource accounting and budgeting. The Privy Council Office has no plans to dispose of the silver and hopes to make arrangements to put at least some of it on display if the necessary secure facilities can be arranged.

Privacy and Data-sharing

Lord Brookman: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the Performance and Innovation Unit will publish its report on privacy and data-sharing

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Performance and Innovation Unit's report Privacy and Data-Sharing: The Way Forward for Public Services is being published today. The report is important in the continuing development of customer-focused public services and sets out a strategy for improving the use of personal data in the public sector while still safeguarding individual's pivacy, including:
	(i) Making better use of technology to deliver more secure, more joined-up services—using technology to ensure data are secure at all times and to enable more joined-up, more personalised service delivery;
	(ii) Improving data quality—ensuring that the data held for public service delivery are good quality and up to date;
	(iii) Building public trust—ensuring that clear principles govern the way that personal information is used across the public sector and that there is greater openness in the interactions between public services and their consumers; and
	(iv) Addressing legal problems—ensuring that public services are clear about how the law regulates data-sharing, together with consultation on possible options for legislative change.
	There are a number of recommendations in the report where we need a proper debate before final decisions are made. On those recommendations—set out in the report—the Government are seeking views from all interested parties. For the other recommendations, the Government want to see early progress in taking them forward as part of the strategy in delivering the overall objectives.
	Copies of the report have been placed in the Printed Paper Office and the Libraries.